[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 8 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 7 fully signed off packages * 29 packages missing signoffs * 6 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (8 total) == * bison-2.5.1-1 (i686) * linux-3.4.1-1 (i686) * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (i686) * bison-2.5.1-1 (x86_64) * linux-3.4.1-1 (x86_64) * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (x86_64) * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (i686) * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (15 total) == * bison-2.5.1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * krb5-1.10.2-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * linux-3.4.1-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * pam-1.1.5-4 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * pinentry-0.8.1-4 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * bison-2.5.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * krb5-1.10.2-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * linux-3.4.1-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * pam-1.1.5-4 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (13 total) == * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (1 total) == * libusbx-1.0.11-2 (i686) 1/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (7 total) == * filesystem-2012.6-1 (any) * fakeroot-1.18.4-1 (i686) * fakeroot-1.18.4-1 (x86_64) * pinentry-0.8.1-4 (x86_64) * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64) * pambase-20120602-1 (any) * libusbx-1.0.11-2 (x86_64) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (6 total) == * gc-7.2-1 (i686), since 2012-05-18 * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-18 * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686), since 2012-05-21 * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64), since 2012-05-21 * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (i686), since 2012-05-22 * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (x86_64), since 2012-05-22 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. thomas - 4 signoffs 2. foutrelis - 2 signoffs
Am 06.06.2012 10:07, schrieb Arch Website Notification:
* systemd-185-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs
For those who haven't noticed yet: If your system boots successfully, you should signoff systemd, even if you don't use it. udev/systemd-tools is a split package from systemd, so it is not listed as a separate signoff.
On 06/06/12 18:53, Thomas Bächler wrote:
Am 06.06.2012 10:07, schrieb Arch Website Notification:
* systemd-185-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs
For those who haven't noticed yet: If your system boots successfully, you should signoff systemd, even if you don't use it. udev/systemd-tools is a split package from systemd, so it is not listed as a separate signoff.
I have been not signing off systemd because I do not use systemd... Are we happy with it being signed off for a working systemd-tools? Allan
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 08:00:32PM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
On 06/06/12 18:53, Thomas Bächler wrote:
Am 06.06.2012 10:07, schrieb Arch Website Notification:
* systemd-185-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs
For those who haven't noticed yet: If your system boots successfully, you should signoff systemd, even if you don't use it. udev/systemd-tools is a split package from systemd, so it is not listed as a separate signoff.
I have been not signing off systemd because I do not use systemd... Are we happy with it being signed off for a working systemd-tools?
Allan
I'm okay with this. Until usage is a bit more widespread, I imagine signoffs will be otherwise a bit sparse. d
participants (4)
-
Allan McRae
-
Arch Website Notification
-
Dave Reisner
-
Thomas Bächler